When you were voting, I studied the drone. When you were having coronavirus, I mastered electronic warfare. While you wasted your days at the firing range in pursuit of vanity, I cultivated force projection. And now that the world is on fire and the barbarians are at the gate you have the audacity to come to me for help.
--Anonymous Redditor, 2016 [translated by AmericanNewt8 into 2020ese]

A new kind of warfare has taken the world by storm this year. While most of us were preoccupied with the election, the coronavirus, and the other exciting events that have taken place over this year when decades happen, a small number of people have kept a close watch on distant battlegrounds in the Middle East; where the face of war has changed since January in ways that few would have predicted--and with it the region as a whole.

1. In the Beginning

But let's go back a ways; to the ancient world of circa 1980. Drones were not a new technology in any sense of the word--but they weren't particularly of interest beyond hobbyists, target drones, and occasional odd military projects like the D-21 reconnaissance drone. However, things were changing with the introduction of digital cameras and increasingly capable processors and transmitters as computers rapidly developed--and so it was only a matter of time before someone took advantage of that. That someone was the Israelis. Israel has a high level of technical expertise, large defense needs, but a relatively small industrial base, so it often pioneers technologies of this sort, and so it did with the Tadiran Mastiff.

This innovation quickly proved to be of significant utility in the First Lebanon War. Besides spotting Yasser Arafat, leader of the PLO, they played a crucial role in the still-infamous "Bekaa Valley turkey shoot" in which Israeli aircraft supported by UAVs destroyed a massive quantity of top-of-the-line Soviet hardware--almost 90 Syrian aircraft and 29 surface-to-air missile batteries at the total loss of minor damage to a pair of F-15s and one UAV shot down. Electronic warfare and AWACs control also proved crucial in this conflict, which in many ways paved the way for the successes of Desert Storm and the 2003 Iraq invasion; and reportedly shattered the self-confidence of the Soviet Union in its air defenses.

Since that first incident; UAVs have become an increasingly prominent part of the arsenal, particularly of the United States; though Israel and China also manufacture numerous UAVs and theirs are more popular in the export market due to lower prices and fewer scruples about "human rights" or "political stability". UAVs have become key reconnaissance assets and popular for precision-strike counter-insurgency missions. However, neither the United States nor China can claim credit for the latest developments--and Israel, at best, has played a peripheral role. The nation that everyone is watching now is Turkey.

2. Turkey

For most of history, Turkey; or at least the geographical area of Anatolia, was a great power of some shape or another. The modern Turkey, however, rejected the idea of empire and foreign adventurism under Ataturk; the father of the Republic. While it has generally tended towards the West--directed in that way both softly by the allure of Europe and drive for modernization; and with great force by the military, which has tended to depose any government that even hinted at reintroducing religious or Middle Eastern aspects back into the aggressively secular Republic, Turkey has not been a particularly major player in the past century. Despite joining NATO for protection against the Soviet Union--which despised Turkey's chokehold on the Bosporous--it never had much appetite for interventionism.

In the era of the "Great Convergence", where nations seem to be returning to historical norms of influence and power, it should be no real surprise then that Turkey has become more assertive. It has grown much wealthier thanks to its association with Europe; and that wealth is actually created by the Turks, not dug up out of the ground like it is in much of the Middle East. It is more educated; more progressive [this of course being a rather relative term] and, importantly, much better at fighting, than most of its neighbors.

Turkey has been working to build a domestic armaments industry with great success--barring a handful of key items like jet engines which hardly anyone can manufacture well, Turkey can do most things. In between indigenous development and picking up knowledge from South Korea, China, Ukraine, and so on, Turkey has one of the world's better arms industries--I'd say it's about reached the level that South Korea was at ten or twenty years ago, which is pretty good. Its drone program, however, started because of a different problem.

The Turks wanted drones back in the early 2000s for what we in the business call "reasons". Evidently the United States saw through this; because, despite allowing Turkey to license-assemble F-16s and build parts for the F-35, it did not sell Turkey drones for fear that they would be used against the Kurds[a perception that proved to be correct as Turkey has indeed used its UAVs against Kurdish insurgents]. As a result, Turkey decided to do it themselves, and started building up their own drone program from scratch. By the beginning of 2020, Turkey had a large drone program and advanced electronic-warfare equipment. But nobody was really paying attention to their drone program; it was a sideshow of limited interest compared to the big players, that would presumably be of some utility but not a game-changer. I mean, their premiere drone literally used an engine made for homebuilt aircraft and was the size and weight of a smart car. Nothing too impressive. That is, until January.

3. Libya

The Libyan conflict is a deeply convoluted one that is difficult to explain. In essence; Libya has been in some sort of civil war since Gaddafi was deposed in 2011, but the most recent division is between the GNA, or Government of National Accord--the UN-recognized government of Libya located in Tripoli--and the "Tobruk Government" which acts as a rubber-stamp body for Gaddafi wannabe General Haftar. Haftar started off this year with things looking pretty good. After breaking the second cease-fire agreement in as many years, flush with cash and support from the United Arab Emirates, Russia, and France, Haftar was on the move, pushing for Tripoli itself. It was going to take a while, but nothing could stop Haftar from defeating the ragtag GNA militias.

Nothing, that is, until Turkey unexpectedly showed up because of a completely different dispute over rights to the seas around Cyprus. Libya [the GNA to be precise] was willing to delineate its boundary with Turkey in a way which cut off Greek and Cypriot claims, and, in return, Turkey arrived after a highly contentious vote in the normally placid Turkish Grand National Assembly, with Syrian mercenaries in tow; but also a large number of drones--mostly the Bayraktar TB2-- and KORAL land-based standoff jammers.

What happened next was a deep humiliation for Russia in particular. Russia and the UAE had supplied General Haftar with a number of its premiere short-range air defense system, the much-vaunted Pantsir which was designed to shoot down UAVs, cruise missiles, and other small munitions. Unfortunately, the Pantsir proved much worse at shooting down Turkish drones than serving as target practice for them. Estimates suggest 23 systems were destroyed [Turkey even captured one system and presumably picked it apart for intelligence] while perhaps ~16 Bayraktar TB2 drones were destroyed--which doesn't sound terrible until one remembers that those drones caused significantly more destruction than the air-defense systems and come in at a third of the price; and becomes even less favorable when one realizes that as the conflict went on the ratio flipped increasingly in favor of the Turks. Ultimately, the Turks achieved their goal, with Haftar being pushed back to Sirte and another cease-fire agreement being signed. This conflict, however, has contributed significantly to the increasing rift between France and Turkey, and their respective relations with Russia.

4. Syria

Russia likes to test its luck--to see what exactly it can get away with. Invading Crimea, shooting down a civilian airliner, attempting to murder exiles with Novichok. Often, it does get away with it. But when nations actually push back, they often find great weakness--for instance, the infamous incident where Americans killed 200 Russian "mercenaries" in Syria after Russia denied they were Russian soldiers, or when American cyberwarriors shut down Russian trolls during the 2018 election. Nowhere is this more illustrated than in Syria, where, early this year, a "Syrian" airstrike killed 29 Turkish soldiers even though Russian involvement was an open secret.

What followed was not the usual vague condemnation and angry letter-writing that one might have expected. Instead, Turkey responded with a substantial escalation of force, again largely done by drones. Ultimately, around 200 Syrian government soldiers were killed in this short offensive--along with 45 tanks, 33 artillery pieces, 33 transport/utility vehicles, 20 armored vehicles, a pair of Su-24 aircraft that attacked a Turkish drone, and several SAM systems, which again proved largely ineffective against Turkish drones. While the conflict stopped before it went any further, the lesson was clear: Turkey was willing to escalate beyond where Russia was willing or able to respond, and there wasn't anything they could do about it.

Besides having a nice moral--extremely hard pushback is the best way to respond to Russian provocation, because they aren't expecting it and can't fight back since they lack effective escalation methods--this conflict proved again that Turkish drones were highly effective even against a state actor [albeit a weak one, like Syria]. The world watched--but nowhere else as closely as Azerbaijan.

5. Artsakh

Artsakh is; or perhaps more aptly was, an Armenian state--not recognized by any other state--within the borders of the former Azerbaijan SSR. It emerged out of the First Nagorno-Karabakh War, one of the nastier conflicts resulting from the breakup of the Soviet Union. In short; the Soviet Union put an ethnically Armenian area in the Azerbaijan SSR that was semi-autonomous; called Nagorno-Karabakh, that Armenians viewed as rightfully part of Armenia. When the Soviet Union broke apart--even before it had done so completely--Armenia and Azerbaijan were already engaging in low-level fighting; and in scenes reminiscent of the Partition of 1949, Azeris living in Armenia fled the country--as did their Armenian counterparts in Azerbaijan.

Then, as the Soviet Union properly collapsed, both sides geared up for war. The Soviet Union had left quite a lot of stuff lying around as it collapsed; and Azerbaijan ended up with the bulk of it due to the disposition of Soviet forces. Both sides bought black-market weapons and armaments from conscript soldiers in the confusion of the the collapse. And then they went to war.

The result was a years-long, brutal conflict that killed tens of thousands of people--in two relatively small countries--and, despite Azerbaijan having more equipment, more men, and more foreign support--from Turkey, which never had much love for Armenia and was building ties with the Turkic peoples of Central Asia [of whom the Azeris are one], and from Israel, who saw a potential new partner in a dangerous region. Armenia had some support from Russia, largely due to connections through a shared religion, nervousness about the Turks, and feelings among the Russian elite that were more sympathetic to Armenia.

However, against all odds, the Armenians emerged victorious. In 1994, with the Armenians poised to break out of the mountains and attack the heart of Azerbaijan, and Azerbaijan exhausted from years of war, a cease-fire was signed.

From that day onwards; both nations began preparing for the return of conflict. It was only a matter of time. Armenia had not only taken Nagorno-Karabakh, they had taken large portions of ethnically Azeri land as well, including sites that were of paramount cultural and historical importance to the Azeris. They also engaged in ethnic cleansing, and to this day Azerbaijan, at least nominally, has hundreds of thousands of refugees from the conflict.

In the intervening years, however, things changed. In particular; Turkey rose to a newfound regional prominence, and Azerbaijan, though being careful to always maintain a measure of proximity to Russia sufficient to not cause its rulers concern, slowly drifted towards Turkey and Israel. Ties with Turkey stretched to a mutual defense agreement. Ties to Israel included offering potential basing in Azerbaijan, the sale of oil [not many nations would sell Israel oil until recently] along with shadowy intelligence connections--Mossad operations in Iran are believed to be launched out of Azerbaijan [for a number of reasons, Iran and Azerbaijan don't like each other very much]. And Azerbaijan, noted for its oil reserves as far back as the Second World War; collected large revenues which it sunk into military spending. Meanwhile, Armenia, despite making large purchases from Russia, fell behind in military readiness, and in its economy--not helped by the fact that, because of a mix of pro-Azeri Turkish policy and Armenian distrust and even hatred of Turkey [thanks to the fact that Turkey argues over whether even discussing "those unfortunate events of 1915" is okay], the Turkish border remains closed--meaning that trade can only go via Iran or Georgia.

Meanwhile, the peace process dithered on, with occasional small skirmishes breaking out. The regular theme was that Armenia would hand over the Azeri-majority [now unoccupied] territory it captured, and Nagorno-Karabakh would, in return, be recognized, or become autonomous, or something of the sort. The Minsk Group led these efforts; though not particularly well--all three members had significant biases. The Russians were pro-Armenian though not anti-Azeri [mostly, they were in favor of the status quo, which favored them], the French were pro-Armenian [on account of disliking Turkey and having a politically influential Armenian population much like the Cubans in Miami], and the Americans were sufficiently pro-Azeri that they created manuals like this and defending the fictional nation of Atropia [which just happens to be an oil-rich, pro-Western autocracy that is exactly where Azerbaijan is] against foreign invaders became a meme among the US military--you can buy "Atropia Veteran" swag, and it became so transparent that Europeans complained about "defending autocrats" in the exercise and Turkish officials complained that "Limaria" [Armenia] included areas that should have been in "Kemalia" [Turkey].

Ultimately, by 2020, a few things had changed. After victory in clashes in 2016, and purchases of new arms, Azerbaijan was confident that it wouldn't fail due to military incompetence like last time. Armenia had elected a new leader, more distant from Russia [especially since he came to power in a 'color revolution'], complicating any Russian response. Not only that, but Armenia had begun settling in territory that was formerly ethnically Azeri, and had attempted to rewrite history so the land they had taken was somehow always Armenian, making a land swap less tenable--especially after the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh was renamed to the Republic of Artsakh. Domestic protests about a lack of action on the issue further spurred action, but perhaps the most decisive factor was Turkey's drone-fueled rampage and Russia's no good, very bad year elsewhere [from the domestic economy to the chaos in Belarus].

So at the end of September 2020, they went to war.

6. Curb-stomp battle

Course of the conflict by Liveuamap

Initially, the war looked like it was serious, but not out of line with previous escalations. Azeri and Armenian forces clashed along the border--but then Azerbaijan made a major incursion along the southern border, which is flat and nearly completely unpopulated, and through the rest of the war pushed through there until they ultimately cut the single road leading to Nagorno-Karabakh from Armenia when they recaptured Shusha. At that point, Armenia capitulated.

While the exact details of why this happened are of relatively little importance, what does matter is what drones did. Armenian air defenses proved completely defenseless against the onslaught of Azerbaijan, with even larger and heavier systems like Russia's S-300 being destroyed by Turkish-manufactured drones. Even the An-2, a literal Soviet 1940s cropdusting biplane, proved lethal to air defenses when rigged with the right equipment.

As a result, Azerbaijan swept across Armenian forces with drones, targeting anything larger than a bicycle, destroying tanks, artillery pieces, and surface-to-air-missile systems alike. While initially Azerbaijan didn't advance, they pursued a strategy of attrition against Armenian forces--and were quite successful at it. Nowhere was safe for Armenian infantry--even miles behind the front, drones were still a risk. After a few weeks of this, Azerbaijan began their offensive. This was interrupted by several ceasefires, the most successful of which lasted around fifteen minutes.

In the meantime, Armenia and Azerbaijan engaged in tactics reminiscent of the War of the Cities. Armenians made rocket attacks on Azeri civilian targets, and even ballistic missile strikes with SCUDs and Tokchas against Ganja, an Azeri metropolis, with later attacks also taking place against Barda and other targets. Virtually all sources agree that Armenia conducted a deliberate policy of targeting civilians in retaliation from the advance of Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan, meanwhile, adopted what I would characterize as a callous indifference to Armenian civilian lives. We have relatively little documentation on exactly what they did, but it is likely that major war crimes were committed against Armenian prisoners. However, we do know that rockets and cluster munitions were used against civilian areas of Stepanakert. By and large, though, Azerbaijan's government is mindful of global sensitivities and would rather avoid making itself a bigger villain than it has to be.

7. Ending

By the first week of November, despite appearances, it had become clear Armenia was losing. While they still held most of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, Azeri forces were rapidly closing in on the major road [1 of 2] that connects Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia proper. Armenian forces were demoralized and lacked heavy equipment. Civilians fled; with most of the population of Stepanakert, the capital of Nagorno-Karabakh, fleeing before the road was cut. Analysts had few doubts that, within another few weeks, before winter arrived, Azerbaijan could take all of Nagorno-Karabakh.

But fortunately, several factors coincided. First, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan realized the situation Armenia was in, and presumably began talking about peace. President [and resident dynastic autocrat] of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev had achieved most of the territorial gains he wanted, but as far as I can tell had little to no interest in making his country notorious for what would surely be the ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands of people. Russia was interested in making sure that any deal possible happened that could salvage its privileged position in the region. And since Azerbaijan had acheived its major goals, Turkey was alright with suing for peace as well.

The final impetus was provided by the Azeris taking Shusha, the second-largest city in the region [and one of tremendous cultural importance to the Azeri people], and, at around the same time, the Azeris accidentally shooting down a Russian attack helicopter on the border.

The ultimate deal was incredibly favorable to the Azeris, which should be expected given that they could have taken the rest of the region with relative ease. It involved Armenia vacating most of Nagorno-Karabakh and all the ethnically Azeri land they had taken, bar the Lachin Corridor. Of particular importance to Turkey, and to the Azeri economy, was that the deal created a corridor through Armenia to Azerbaijan's western exclave, and hence to Turkey, for transit. While still an indirect route, it is nowhere near as difficult as traveling around through Georgia. Russia also got to pretend like it still mattered by deploying a few thousand peacekeepers for what seems likely to be a limited time.

Azerbaijan celebrated. As far as anyone was concerned, they had won. Turkey also celebrated--they had, in their view, not only supported the Turkic Azeris in a victory against the Armenians, but also won a battle against Russia to see whom was the real dominant power in the Caucasus. Russia didn't celebrate, but felt that it had at least maintained some sort of influence in the region when initially things looked like they might ultimately sideline Russia entirely. Armenia, however, unsurprisingly, was enraged, and rioters smashed government buildings and forced Prime Minister Pashinyan into hiding; however, it looks like the Armenians realize that they really had no chance of winning and aren't going to resume the conflict.

8. What Now?

In a strange twist of fate, there is some speculation that peace is now more likely than it was before the war. In particular, some think that Turkey will be interested in finally coming to terms with the Armenians and opening its border with Armenia--which would significantly reduce Russian influence in the region and promote economic development--and some speculate that Azerbaijan may now be willing to make a lasting peace deal since it has, essentially, all that it wants.

This war chronicles one of this year's themes--the decline of Russia, and rise of Turkey. I would expect to see more conflict between them in the future, and I'd expect to see, in a strange historical irony, Turkey coming out on top. Russia has not had a very good year at all and I think this conflict is really just the latest example of how far it has fallen in its military capabilities and political influence despite what Putin shows off.

Small drones are now the obsession of every military planner, as is trying to figure out a way to shoot them down reliably. Already a number of nations have expressed interest in buying the Turkish drones that had such a decisive impact on these conflicts. It seems likely that this will especially transform lower-end conflicts where foreign powers can now intervene without risking more than a few million dollars in equipment, and where local powers can now field their own drones and precision-guided munitions while being, for the moment, largely unopposed.

Whatever the ultimate impact, though, it is undeniable that this change in warfare has been one of the more important and interesting bits of 2020 thus far, though it's behind some truly massive things. Unlike the coronavirus, or Donald Trump, however, these trends are probably with us to stay for a while. I don't think we've heard the last of the drone-warfare revolution yet.

NL-ELECTS the House Speaker, 117th Congress, Pelosi v. McCarthy

1st Congress: Madison wins with 57.95 percent of the vote.
2nd Congress: Trumbull Jr. wins with 61.76 percent of the vote
This one has been released way earlier because the House elected its Speaker today, and so should we.
Now,
Nancy Patricia Pelosi
Pelosi is a Democrat who represents California's 12th Congressional district, which spans most of the City and County of San Francisco, in the House.
Pelosi has previously served as the House Speaker from 2007 to 2011 and from 2019 to 2021.
Her political positions:

Pelosi was a founding member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
The American Civil Liberties Union’s Congressional Scorecard has given Pelosi a lifetime rating of 92% for her voting record on civil liberties.
In 2001, she voted in favor of the USA Patriot Act, but voted against reauthorization of certain provisions in 2005.
She voted against a Constitutional amendment banning flag-burning.
Pelosi voted against the Secure Fence Act of 2006.
Pelosi has long supported LGBT rights. In 1996, she voted against the Defense of Marriage Act. In 2004 and 2006, she voted against the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would've amended the US Constitution to define marriage federally as being between one man and one woman.
The LGBT advocacy group Human Rights Campaign gave Pelosi a 100% rating in 2006 for her voting record in the 107th through 109th congresses (2001–2006), indicating that she voted favorably on legislation supported by the organization on every occasion.
Pelosi supports the Equality Act, a bill that would expand the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
Pelosi also opposes Trump's transgender military ban.
Pelosi supports reform in marijuana laws, she also supports use of medical marijuana.
Pelosi supports the Bush/Obama NSA surveillance program PRISM.
Pelosi voted against the 1995 Balanced Budget Proposed Constitutional Amendment
She also spearheaded the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 as part of the 100-Hour Plan. The Act raises the minimum wage in the United States and the territories of the Northern Marianas Islands and American Samoa.
Pelosi opposed the welfare reform proposed by President Bush as well as reforms proposed and passed under President Clinton. She also opposed the tax reform signed by President Trump in December 2017.
In 1999, Pelosi voted against displaying the Ten Commandments in public buildings, including schools. Pelosi voted for the No Child Left Behind Act, which instituted testing to track students' progress and authorized an increase in overall education spending.
Pelosi has supported the development of new technologies to reduce U.S. dependence upon foreign oil and remediate the adverse environmental effects of burning fossil fuels.
Pelosi has blocked efforts to revive offshore oil drilling in protected areas.
Pelosi was instrumental in passing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010.
She does not endorse Senator Bernie Sanders' bill for single-payer healthcare.
Pelosi voted against the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 and earlier attempts at similar bans.
She has voted in favor of lifting the ban on privately funded abortions at overseas U.S. military facilities.
Pelosi stands in favor of increased background checks for potential gun owners, as well as the banning of assault weapons.
Pelosi opposes reinstating the military draft.

Pelosi's foreign policy

In 2008, after a meeting with the Dalai Lama and officials in the Tibetan government-in-exile, Pelosi criticized the People's Republic of China for its handling of the unrest in Tibet; addressing a crowd of thousands of Tibetans in Dharamsala, India, Pelosi called on "freedom-loving people" worldwide to denounce China for its human rights abuses in Tibet.
Pelosi criticized the imprisonment of Hong Kong democracy activists in August 2017.
Before the Trump administration took concrete measures against China in late March 2018, Pelosi and other Democratic leaders pressed Trump to focus more on China and impose real punishments, such as fulfill his own campaign commitments to label China a currency manipulator and stop China from pressuring U.S. tech companies into giving up intellectual property rights.
In September 2019, Pelosi met with Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Joshua Wong on Capitol Hill.
Pelosi publicly scolded Colombian president Álvaro Uribe during Uribe's May 2007 state visit to America.
Pelosi supports normalization of relations with Cuba.
Pelosi opposed U.S. intervention in the 1991 Gulf War.
In 2016, Pelosi opposed two bills that if enacted would block Iran's access to the dollar and impose sanctions for its ballistic missile program.
She supports the Iran nuclear deal.
In 2002, Pelosi opposed the Iraq Resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to use military force against Iraq.
Pelosi's voting record shows consistent support for Israel.
Pelosi supported Israel in the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict.
Nancy Pelosi is one of the few members of Congress to have traveled to North Korea. She has expressed concern about the danger of nuclear proliferation from the North Korean regime, and the ongoing problems of hunger and oppression imposed by that country's leadership.
Pelosi has generally taken a hard stance against Putin and Russia.
Pelosi supports the Syria Accountability Act and Iran Freedom and Support Act.
Pelosi supported the NATO-led military intervention in Libya in 2011. She also favored arming Syria's rebel fighters.
In mid-October 2007, after the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed a resolution to label the 1915 killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as genocide, Pelosi pledged to bring the measure to a vote. (The resolution was actually passed during her second term as Speaker in 2019.)

Kevin Owen McCarthy
Kevin McCarthy is a Republican who represents California's 23rd Congressional district which includes parts of the southern San Joaquin Valley, the Tehachapi Mountains and southern Sierra Nevada, and the northwestern Mojave Desert. It comprises most of Kern County and portions of Los Angeles and Tulare counties. Cities in the district include Porterville, Ridgecrest, most of Bakersfield, and part of Lancaster.
He previously served as House Majority Whip from January 3, 2011 to August 1, 2014 and House Majority Leader from August 1, 2014 to January 3, 2019.
His political positions:

McCarthy is a supporter of the Hyde Amendment, and in 2011 co-sponsored a bill, the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" (NTFAA), to make the Hyde Amendment permanent.
McCarthy received a 100% rating from the National Right to Life Committee, and a 0% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America.
On September 17, 2020, McCarthy voted against House Resolution 908 to condemn racism against Asian-Americans related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
McCarthy was an early supporter of Trump in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries.
In October 2019, McCarthy said "there's nothing that the president did wrong" in regards to President Trump requesting that the Ukrainian President start an investigation into 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
McCarthy has been frequently at odds with environmental groups; the League of Conservation Voters has given him a lifetime score of 3%.
McCarthy does not accept the scientific consensus on climate change, that is to say, he's a climate change denier.
In 2011, McCarthy was the primary author of the "Wilderness and Roadless Area Release Act" (H.R. 1581), legislation that would strip 60 million acres of public lands of protected status.
McCarthy received campaign donations from Saudi Arabia's lobbyists.
McCarthy voiced support for Hong Kong protesters.
McCarthy supported killing Soleimani.
McCarthy said he supported Israel's planned annexation of the West Bank.
As House majority leader, McCarthy led efforts to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA or Obamacare).
McCarthy opposed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, which added perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disabilities as protected classes under existing federal hate crimes law. He has voted against the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007.
Throughout 2018, McCarthy opposed efforts to codify the legal status of DREAMers after Trump suspended Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) which provided temporary stay for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as minors.
McCarthy supports the ICE and co-authored a resolution in support of it in 2018.
McCarthy was a supporter of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which barred federal recognition of same-sex marriage and banned same-sex couples from receiving federal spousal benefits.
McCarthy has a "D-" rating from National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws regarding his voting record on cannabis-related matters.
In August 2018, McCarthy co-signed a letter spearheaded by John Garamendi, Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson, calling for Trump to "send more federal aid to fight" the wildfires across the state of California.
McCarthy introduced the FORWARD Act in 2018, which "would provide $95 million in research funding for valley fever and other fungal diseases". The bill provides $5 million for a "blockchain pilot program", facilitating sharing data between doctors and scientists researching such diseases. It would also fund $8 million in matching grant money to be awarded every year for five years to local groups applying for research grants, as well as $10 million each year for five years to CARB-X, a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services public-private partnership.
On October 23, 2018, McCarthy tweeted that George Soros, Tom Steyer and Mike Bloomberg, were trying to “buy” the upcoming midterm election.
McCarthy claims that social media platforms, such as Twitter, are actively censoring conservative politicians and their supporters.

VOTE HERE!

Photo of Pelosi marching for LGBTQ+ rights in 1987, during the Reagan Administration
NO PROTEST VOTES!

Progress Report 1: Welcome to Endless Grey

The clock hits midnight and the crowd cheers, 2050 is here!
Hello everyone, my name is Bread and today my team and I are proud to present the very first Chaos in Diversity Progress Report. Though our discord has been filled with teasers and development updates, our development team has finally reached a point where we have enough content done to showcase it all to you in a more formal setting. So, what is this mod?

Introduction To Dystopia:

Chaos in Diversity (or CiD) is an upcoming mod set not in the past but in the near future, 2050.
Though, notably, this is not our attempt to predict the future, only to create a world that seems plausible. We set ourselves a soft 'Point of Departure' in mid-2018, the point in which we would stop updating our lore in accordance with real world events. The sole exemption to this fact, so far, has been COVID-19, which we worked into our lore in one form. So remember, our history and the mod’s history have already departed in key ways, some of which you’ll be able to spot even in this PR.
The world of Chaos in Diversity is noticeably more multipolar than our own, due to both the decline of American influence and the rise of Chinese power on the world stage. An economic phenomena known as the Pacific Shift has seen the economic centre of the world rapidly shift towards the east, realigning the politics of the world drastically. Furthermore, climate change has continued on its seemingly unstoppable course, bringing rising sea levels, desertification, and countless events which will shape the lives of those within. Our development team has worked hard to create a world on the halfway point to a plausible dystopia: it seems as though the optimism of the early 21st century has been snuffed out and the global slide into mediocrity, despotism, and conflict appears inexorable.
Or perhaps not, should you play your cards right.
While there’s a lot of history to get into, we’ll be talking about one of our custom mechanics first. But before jumping into that, take a moment to enjoy these.
Our Starting Screen
Our World Map
And some of our Loading Screens which should help set the tone!
Now, please remember that everything here is a work in progress. Everything is subject to change, especially when it comes to balancing the mod.

Economic Points

At this point, we’re all quite familiar with HOI IV mods trying to emulate the complex system of economics that keep countries running. The clunky system inherited from base Hoi4 leaves much to be desired, as one designed purely for a massive endgame conflict. However, trying to accurately portray modern economics at this point (or even future economics) is a task which seems insurmountable. Systems which try to perfectly emulate real world economies tend to be restrictive rather than additive, limiting what are already fairly scarce mechanics from the base game even further. As such, we’ve had to turn to an old friend (or enemy, depending on who you ask): Abstraction.
That’s why we have tried a different approach with the introduction of the EP system (short for “economic points”). EPs are supposed to represent government income from taxes, trade and other forms of revenue and are used by the government to fund its services, invest into public works, or whatever other projects may come to mind. The EP system indirectly ties into laws and policies, as some policies have a cost to them that the government needs to pay. EP, in this regard, mostly works like political points and for good reason: by making government economics as abstract as the concept of “political power”, it fits right in the weird economic system of HOI IV as a type of monthly-gained mana instead of concepts such as GDP.
Economic Points
Let’s go over the different things you see, shall we:

Taxation income: a monthly income that depends on your total population and the amount of civilian factories that your nation has. To keep nations like China not too OP (and believe me, without this China was quite up there) the benefit you gain from civilian factories is lowered and the benefits of population are also lowered if a total population reaches a certain amount. Before that, India and China dominated in tax income, gaining around +1000 EP per month.
Other income: a catch-all-term for income that isn’t from taxing people or companies or from trade. This is mostly for events, decisions and focuses as a variable that isn’t tied to another variable like population.
Export: a monthly income depending on the pricing of resources and how much your nation exports. We get to the pricing of resources in a bit, but the general gist of export income should be quite clear.
Government expenses: a monthly cost that exists due to certain policies, laws and the size of the army.
Debt: currently still in a processing stage, but debt can be accumulated throughout the game by governments borrowing EPs from several institutions. This system should represent the old time v accessibility conflict, as a player can of course wait until he has enough EP to do certain projects but he can also decide to borrow enough EP to start his project early and pay more money as a result later. This system would also include interest on the paid debt, but again, it’s still WIP.
Corruption: unlike all the other things on here, corruption isn’t a simple cost or income, but instead a percentage that represents how much corruption your government has. Corruption is generally a bad thing to have, as it subtracts a percentage of your monthly income, and it’s thus recommended to keep it as low as possible.
Import: the opposite of export. Everything nations import will have a cost to it outside of the civilian factories that you trade in for your precious resources. Again, the cost of import is the amount of resources you import times the price of one piece of that resource. Which brings us to…
Resource prices: these variables are updated monthly and look at the total amount of a certain resource that is produced (the supply) and the amount that is imported globally (the demand), creating the price of the resources. Due to the prices being dependent on supply and demand, they’ll be quite volatile. What you can generally expect out of this is that prices for resources like steel and aluminium will increase during the game’s duration as more conflicts start and more military factories are built that need their resources, all the while the supply doesn’t change drastically. For oil, however, something different could happen. To increase the pricing of oil to make it profitable, civilian factories consume a small bit of fuel from gamestart, kickstarting quite a healthy oil price (testgames show an average starting price of around 10, which is 2.5 times as high as the average aluminium price and around 10 times as high as steel and rubber prices). However, later technologies will lower fuel consumption of these factories drastically, representing the shift away from fossil fuels in many nations and towards sustainable energy sources, which is great for the environment but can have a deadly impact on global oil prices. When the game reaches this stage, expect extreme measures to be taken by nations that depend on oil for their EP income (especially as some nations will have EP be directly tied to their survival as a state).

With Economic Points, we hope to create a system in which the player has MORE options to approach their gameplay with, rather than less. Sure, one might want to have as large a military as possible, but your EP will take a serious hit in the process.
Hell, who knows where a player might look for new opportunities to earn EP?
Onto the main content!

China (2050-2052)

In 2050, there is and shall be only one nation which can claim any sort of hegemony: The People’s Republic of China.
While the US saw defeat after defeat domestically and abroad, China seemed to simply move from triumph to triumph, each setback merely a bump in the road. Sure, COVID-25 was somewhat of an embarrassment but, as China led the world through the recovery process, people found they were willing to overlook it and politicians followed suit. Perhaps the Hong Kong situation was mishandled but, ultimately, the international scene eventually looked the other way, for what could be done to stop the CCP?
The situation in Xinjiang was an open secret, deeply horrifying, but would the world truly confront China on the matter? As the years passed, it seemed unlikely.
With economic growth that seemed unstoppable, a pragmatic leadership, and a united party, China began to eclipse all others.
But not everything was united behind the scenes. Xi Jinping, in his efforts to continually centralize and cement his own power as the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, began to alienate members of his own party. Their reasons were many, some simply despised the man, others were worried about the long term stability of putting so much power in the hands of the General Secretary.
Ultimately, their time to strike arose in the most unexpected manner when the General Secretary was struck with a (highly disputed) bout of illness. The actual details on the event are scarce and widely contested. Whether it was a fabrication or a fact, Jinping began to slowly retreat from the spotlight in his role as General Secretary during 2024 and the Party began to reassert its authority under the pragmatic Hu Chunhua, a change in leadership which arrived just in time for a dramatic upheaval in both domestic and international politics.
The Covid Crash, as it began to be known, wreaked havoc on the global and domestic economy, with the Chinese coastal provinces seeing their development plummet amid a panicked retreat of foreign investment. The knock-on effect of this downward turn led to some of the largest liberal protests in recent Chinese history. Whilst the protests dragged on for many months, Chunhua was focused on an economic, not military, solution to the crisis. His caution was well-rewarded, as his plan to ‘turn foreign prosperity into Chinese prosperity’ by filling the void which foreign investment had left proved a boon in both the short and long term, both ending the protests and beginning China’s utter economic independence and dominance.
Chunhua’s successor, Teng Jiang focused on international efforts, the one area in which Chunhua made little progress. Aggressively pushing China’s influence abroad, he solidified the creation of the Asia-Pacific Defense Organisation to secure China’s hegemony over the Pacific in the wake of the Pacific Shift. Jiang was also one of the strongest voices regarding China’s affairs in Africa, leading to massive investments in the struggling East African Federation and other powers who were increasingly falling under the Chinese sphere. At the end of his reign, Jiang had transformed Chunhua’s domestic success into international prestige and power.
Finally, we have Zeng Xinyi, who has been in power since 2042. ‘China’s Uncle’ was swept to power on the back of his cheery persona and electric ability to rouse the masses. Yet, Xinyi is a man deeply troubled by the apparent mediocrity of his own rule. Whilst his flagship program focused on China’s technological sector has broadly been a success, he is overshadowed by the successes of his predecessors. Already, he has been described as a safe but uninspired pair of hands to guide China, carried through his eight years of rule by continued growth and prosperity, none of it his own.
Whilst for the large part he is preoccupied with the preparations for the 101st anniversary of the People’s Republic and the wrangling of the Party’s Political Bureau, Xinyi is not a man who will not allow himself to be idle.
Thus, Xinyi begins to push back against the seemingly inevitable, undermining years of established tradition, trying to get his own ‘protégé’ as the prime candidate for General Secretary.
Perhaps Xinyi has underestimated the complexity which his scheme will require but, once his mind is made, he will not turn back. So begins his gambit. To succeed, he will need to convince key members of the State Bureaucracy, Military, and Party. He will need to avoid the suspicions of his peers. Some of this will come naturally. Some of it will be much harder.
And needless to say, failure is not an option if Xinyi wants to have his future.
At the end of the day, Xinyi's plan will either meet failure...
... or succeed.
But regardless of where his actions lead him, Xinyi has unintentionally revealed deep divisions which run through the core of the party. The future of China as the pre-eminent power of the world is in question and the Party is uncertain of how it should be led forward. Above all you must remember to keep the Party united.
Or the party will take the actions necessary, without you.

The United States of America (2050-2052)

Hello! I’m Michael7123, the lead developer for the United States, and I’m here to tell you how things have gone for the land of the free and home of the brave:
Terribly
How did the United States get here? Well, I’m not going to explain all of America’s lore here. But you can see the Presidents who presided over the decline, as a treat:
45th President: Donald Trump [R] (2017-2025)
46th President: Sherrod Brown [D] (2025-2029)
47th President: Tom Cotton [R] (2029-2037)
(Past this point, it's all original characters)
48th President: Martin Lawrence [D] (2037-2045), a veteran and relative political novice who ran on withdrawing from Lebanon. Withdraws from NATO which soon becomes defunct, reorients American foreign policy to focus on China. Pays little attention to domestic politics.
49th President: Thomas Randal [R] (2045-2046), A Republican who attempted to shift his party economically left, but was assassinated while campaigning for down ballot republicans in the 2046 midterms.
50th President: Andrew Mitchel [R] (2047-2049) The Vice President of Randal who was sworn in after his death and managed to win the presidency in his own right by milking sympathy from his now deceased running mate. A libertarian leaning politician, any shift on economic policy was scrapped. After winning re-election, a scandal known as “Floodgate” began, and it eventually was uncovered that Mitchel had been taking bribes from Chinese companies to ensure the departments of justice and labour wouldn’t raise a fuss when they violated health and safety standards while operating in the United States. In 2050, matters reached a climax in an impeachment and conviction by the senate.
51st President: Samuel Sanford (2049-2050) [D—-> I——>F]
So you’re probably wondering what on earth [D—-> I——>F] means. It happens that Mitchel’s Vice President, knowing full well that he would be next to be impeached as he was implicated in the Floodgate scandal, resigned while the Senate was voting to convict Mitchel. With no president or Vice President, the Presidency passed to the Democratic Speaker of the house by default, Samuel Sanford. Seeing the horrendous political optics of an impeachment vote that he facilitated in resulting in his own party’s power growing at the expense of the GOP, he quickly announced his departure from the Democratic Party to become an independent.
Soon afterward, he held a press conference, joined by members of the political establishment in both the Democratic and Republican parties to announce the creation of the Federalist Party: a centrist political institution to quell the rising tides of radicalism, and corruption, and heinous violence plaguing America. While the party is split on ideological lines, Sanford called on all who wished to uphold liberal democracy to back his new creation.
There were very few takers. As things stand at game start, both the Democratic and Republican parties have lost their leaders, and the new Federalist Party, while controlling the executive branch and managing to corral members of each party in both houses of Congress to function, they remain deeply unpopular among the public at large, and appear to be set to lose horrendously in the upcoming midterm elections of 2050.
President Sanford can decide that somewhat more drastic measures are required to stave off the illiberal forces trying to change the American way of life. For the 2050 elections will not only determine who controls Congress: it also happens to be a census year, and whoever controls the various state legislatures controls the shape and size of congressional districts. The fate of the House of Representatives is of vital importance, as with the 2052 Presidential Race shaping up to be a 3 way contest between Samuel Sanford and whomever the Democratic and Republican parties nominate, it’s exceedingly likely that no candidate will win an outright majority of the Electoral College, which means that the President will be determined by a majority of state delegations in the House of Representatives.
Of course, the Federalist Party doesn’t have to engage in shenanigans. Additionally, all three parties are capable of achieving a victory in the 2050 midterms. The beginning of the trees for each party to work with and/or antagonize the Sanford Administration can be seen here:
Democrats
Federalists
Republicans
Of course, it should go without saying that if the legally dubious actions of the Federalist Party are discovered by the public at large, there will be dire consequences.
Regardless of who occupies the Whitehouse next, they’re going to have to contend with the increasingly powerful Supreme Court. In an effort to highlight just how important the institution is to the United States in 2050, we’ve opted to create an entirely unique Supreme Court mechanic
The bar on the right shows the current legitimacy of the Supreme Court as an institution. The higher it is, the more respected it is by the public at large. Whenever the court is viewed as legitimate, judges decide cases based on their ideological leanings. All pretensions about impartiality aside, the Supreme Court is a political institution. However when the legitimacy of the Supreme Court falls too low, the Chief Justice might start rallying judges who are similar to him or her ideologically to start deciding cases in ways to preserve the court’s legitimacy, and such efforts may or may not be successful.
Regardless of how the presidential election goes, Sanford will have the opportunity to appoint and nominate a new Chief Justice of the court in 2050. This decision will have extensive repercussions for the rest of the game, so you’ll want to pick carefully.
You will also be able to directly increase or decrease the court’s legitimacy at the cost of political power, , but there’s only so much attack ads and press conferences can accomplish. Should the legitimacy of the court fall enough, you can try to pack the court. Of course, it goes without saying that this sets a dangerous precedent.
And beyond that, the road to 2054 awaits...
But that's for another time. Thank you!

Western Europe (2050-2052)

Hi all! We're Erwin, Michael7123, and Preussenball, and we’re going to discuss the history of Western Europe and the trials and tribulations of it’s two most prominent countries, France and Germany.
Why only Western Europe? Well, keep reading and you’ll understand.
France, Lebanon, and the collapse of NATO:

Lebanon. Tensions between Hezbollah and the government have soured immensely in recent years. When push comes to shove, Hezbollah officially abandons its policy of relative cooperation, declaring an end to the Lebanese state in its current form. This event leads to the kickstarting of the Lebanese civil war, a conflict that draws Europe’s attention in several ways, one of which being that Lebanon is a member of the Good Neighbour Policy. However, despite all this, Europe learned from Iraq and Afghanistan and is unwilling to get it’s hands dirty in Lebanon.

This changes on the 1st of January 2035, a day of national tragedy for France. After the hijacking of a French airplane by a group connected to Hezbollah, the French Airforce had no other choice but to shoot it down before it collided with Palais Bourbon. The death of 102 passengers would spark outrage in Europe and the US, giving then President of the United States Tom Cotton the ammunition he was hoping for. The USA, emboldened by this brazen act of terrorism, convinces a coalition of France and other European nations and Israel to formalize a coalition against Hezbollah, starting the NATO intervention in Lebanon in 2036. The President of France at the time, Chandler Laurent of Les Républicains was among the intervention’s strongest supporters.
While the conflict itself was already terrible, muddied by another refugee crisis in Europe, the intervention wouldn’t be better, as the American nation-building strategy developed after Iraq and Afghanistan simply couldn’t apply to Lebanon. 2037 would see US troops being pulled out of Lebanon shortly after the inauguration of President Lawrence. One by one, other members of the coalition withdrew, and after the USA abruptly withdrew from NATO in the same year, France was left desperately trying to wage a war that, while still popular domestically, was being criticized by the public for not being waged decisively enough, and moreover trying to what was left of NATO together at the same time.
In the end, President Chandler Laurent announced in 2038 that France would be scaling back their involvement in Lebanon to pre-war levels, leaving Lebanon in its current state. Les Républicains found itself sharply divided over the issue, leading to half of the party breaking away in protest to form Voici la France! under the leadership of Antoine Dimont, a liberal conservative.
Laurent resigned as president following a vote of no confidence collapsing his cabinet. In the ensuing snap elections, France brought La France Insoumise, a social democratic party that took the place of the defunct Parti socialiste and briefly held power in the late 2020s. What followed was 10 years of relative stability for France, albeit coupled with their formal withdrawal from NATO, sealing the fate of the organization. In that time, France went on to make rapid progress in the goal of reaching carbon neutrality, and focused on strengthening their domestic economy with a great deal of success- but more on the long term consequences of that later.
However, while the past 10 years were primarily prosperous, voices in France grew called for France to take a more active role on the world stage- and with good reason too, given what befell the European Union mere years after the collapse of NATO. At game start they are governed by a coalition between La République En Marche! And Voici la France! In the National Assembly, with Antoine Dimont in his first term as President, which began in 2048.
France in 2050
Today, we’ll be focusing on President Dimont’s plans of ushering Europe towards a greener future. When most people think of green politics, they imagine youthful activists wearing tie dye shirts, maybe throwing buckets of red paint at CEO’s if they are particularly feisty, but who are otherwise inoffensive and harmless. President Dimont, in contrast, is making the effort to rely on a more environmentally friendly way to bolster French power, prestige, and influence across Europe
And what better way to do that than by going after Gazprom, the Russian Energy giant that serves as an unwanted Russian foothold on the European Energy market. While most of the “Energy War” will be about outstripping Russian Energy production and investing in new energy technologies, you will also have much more… forceful... ways of trying to combat Russia and Gazprom. You can expect to read much more about this once we showcase Russia to you all in an upcoming progress report, but, as an extra treat.
On top of this, the French government wishes to repair the European Union. Why “repair”? I’m glad you asked….
Germany, Greece, and the secession of the East:
As a result of the collapse of NATO in the late 2030s, Germany found itself funding the Bundeswehr more than ever before, and at the time, few complained. It made sense, after all. With NATO gone, Germany could no longer rely upon American benevolence for the protection of Europe. Nobody outside of the political fringe would have predicted that it would need to be used so quickly.
The Greek election of 2040 was not won by one of the traditional parties, nor even a radical fringe party, but by the new Greek Reform Party created 7 months prior to the election by the famous Chinese-Greek businessman Georgi Vidalides. His victory was met with international outrage, as a previous investigation by the Greek government had exposed the party accepting funds from Chinese companies tied with the Chinese Government. Tension between the newly elected Greek government and the European Union would lead to the Greek PM pushing the parliament to leave the European Union outright and reneging on their financial commitments to the economic bloc. The EU declared that Vidalides had acted outside of his democratic mandate by publicly bribing members of parliament and actively ignoring the demands of the Greek high court and was thus guilty of plotting an end to Greek democracy.
Chancellor Lennart Dittrich of the Christlich Demokratische Union (at the time in a coalition with Die Grünen and Freie Demokratische Partei), was not the man people thought would drag Germany into an offensive war. A soft spoken and collegial former journalist, a man who easily could have gone down as a good but forgettable Chancellor was wound up ensuring his name would become mud because viral footage came out of Greek police who brutally arrested an investigative journalist in suspect circumstances. Whilst officially not the event which triggered later events, it was after this fact that Chancellor Dittrich gave a press conference where he vowed that it was time for the European Union to act in order to defend its values.
When the vote on forming a coalition to invade Greece came to the Bundestag, it set off a political firestorm that would shake Germany to its core. In the end, the vote passed by the slimmest of margin, contingent upon dozens of amendments, compromises, and contingent on getting other nations of the EU to support the coalition. Dissent ranged from nearly the entire SPD to defecting conservatives (particularly from the Bavarian CSU).
Once again, the German military was on the march, readying itself to invade foreign soil (even if under an agreeable cause). All of this was met with resounding condemnation from the Visegrád Group and other eastern European members of NATO. And on the day when the first German boots landed on Greek soil, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, and Hungary all announced that they intended to begin the process of leaving the European Union.
But things might have been salvageable up until then. Then everything went to hell when the Old Royal Palace was hit with a bomb that killed most of the Greek government. In a panicked frenzy, the V4 all unilaterally removed themselves from the European union to form their own economic bloc, and were soon followed by a majority of the European Union's member states in Eastern Europe
While the situation of the Union of Visegrad (or colloquially: the Eastern European Union) will be discussed in a later progress report, here is the new face of Europe
While the initial occupation in Greece itself was met with, if not goodwill, than at least not overt hostility by the Greek people, after the deaths of their government, however unpopular, resentment spiked. For the Bundeswehr and other members of the Greek military, the next 4 years were spent trying to suppress terrorists of every shape and size.
And it is ultimately from one of these terrorist attacks, however indirectly, that lead to the complete restructuring of the German political system. It was the rise of Viktor Kapp and his Deutsche Friedenspartei.
And with that, troops started pouring out of Germany as the diplomats started pouring in.
The Coalition of the Roses had one truly grand accomplishment, and that was effectively ending the Greek crisis. But in choosing to work with the DFP, the SPD had legitimated their newest rival. With the collapse of the CDU and the descent of the AfD into deeper and deeper levels of reaction, the DFP managed to present themselves as the big tent party of everyone from the right wing to the center without any of the troubling political baggage of older political movements, while also drawing the support of some on the political left more focused on the effective exercise of state power than about issues of culture (albeit in far smaller numbers).
Yet it was this very blender of ideologies that resulted in the DFP’s increasing popularity, and the creation of a new party at the European level: the Eins Europa Parti, dedicated to the transformation of what remains of the European Union into a single, federal state.
In terms of gameplay, Germany starts in the middle of Kapp’s second term and is thus busy with the promises he has made during the 2049 election. While every issue is important, such as the veteran issue and the growing radicalism among the German youth, the main issue Kapp faces in his second term as chancellor is the Greek question: what is Germany still doing in Greece?
This question is mainly formed by the factionalism of the party between Engels and Denzinger, with Denzinger opting for pulling out of Greece while Engels is worried about the stability of the region and only thinks limited retreat is necessary. These issues are also made more important with the next election in mind. Kapp, Denzinger and Engels are quite worried about the situation as the 2049 election was won by only one seat. However, if the events during the season are anything to go by this election won’t go the same as 2049. If the DFP wins this year’s election by a larger margin than 2049, it will be quite secure in seeking to achieve its goals in the third Kapp government.
On the Future of Europe:
It is a widely acknowledged truth that the current status quo in Europe cannot and will not last, both France and Germany can agree on this. On what direction they should take, on the other hand, the two are divided. France insists that until the schism between East and West is fixed, Europe will always be fragile. In uncertain times, they look to instill Europe with strength and security, and to this end, they propose the European Defense Community.
Germany, meanwhile, looks to perhaps loftier goals. The weakness of Europe shall always be its division, they might argue, and that only through a true political union can their goals be realised. They look to form the EU into a single political entity.
The struggle for influence over Europe take place over ten years of gameplay through our European Struggle GUI. As each country obtains political success, they’ll be able to gain influence points. After every 10 points, they’ll be able to activate the first step of their European reforms.
However, bringing together the myriad states of Europe together will not be a trivial task in the slightest, with each reform stacking the odds against the player further and further…
And should you not be careful, the whole thing might break.

Africa (2050-2052)

2050 will be an important decade for Africa, for more reasons than one. For many countries on the continent, they shall be marking one hundred years since the end of colonialism. A hundred years of independence from the European powers. Many more will be asking themselves, how much better have things gotten?
The answer, as always, is difficult to say.
The 2025 Covid Crash was a brutal period for the African continent. Whilst the disease itself seemingly dealt less damage than some more unprepared western countries, the ensuing financial crash sent a wave of disruption through the continent. Though its effects were varied and myriad, the most important event during this period was the Crisis of the East African Federation, in which the crisis of both health and finances caused a wave of reactionary nationalism to trash negotiations for the unification of the region’s nations into the East African Federation - right as the nations were supposed to be unifying. Whilst the East African Federation soldiered on, it was a sign that the path towards peace for the continent was not guaranteed.
And it didn’t get any better from there.
Over the next 25 years, the African Union would be mired by the growth of three opposing blocks, the Continental African Committee, the Triple Alliance, and the United Front for African Democracy. The coalescence into these blocks was a slow and fully preventable process but by the time the world realised what was happening, the reactions had already begun and mere hindsight could not prevent it. There was no one inciting event which diplomats could’ve talked out but rather a thousand slights, mistakes, and grudges building over fifty years of high tension. Or maybe the roots went back even further than that?
To the west, the United Front for African Democracy was pitched as the battle against Chinese influence in the region, though this seems… tenuous at best. To the east, the Continental African Committee was pitched as the final battle against neo-colonialism but is accused of simply being one appendage of Chinese power. The only group which can truly call itself free from influence is the Triple Alliance, although the group is rather dysfunctional, and critics point to tensions over Triple Alliance sponsored plundering in the Eastern DRC as the only reason why the three nations have not joined the UFAD.
But, at the dawn of 2050 at least, it does not appear as though the blocks will ever achieve much, other than pointless bickering.
That is until the death of Nnamdi Christian.
A Left-Wing Nigerian firebrand, Nnamdi Christian is the rising star of Nigerian politics. A young man who challenges the corrupt, decaying establishment of the oil-rich nation. On the back of massive wealth inequality, concerns about climate change, and a two party system which is practically an oligarchy, Nnamdi Christian seems set to achieve the seemingly impossible and win the 2051 Nigerian Elections.
This changes very quickly.
The botched assassination not only captures the attention of an outraged Nigerian general public but every African on the continent, fed up with a status quo that seems to insist on screwing them over. On election day, the entire world is watching.
As the oligarchy overplays its hand, the results of this election are all the continent needs to let the dominoes fall.
By the summer of 2052, this period has taken on a new name: The Summer of Revolutions.
This continental shift in politics is wild and impossible to control, shattering the status quo, with no regime in Africa being beyond its grasp. It seems to be a period of genuine change for the better. However, there is an old saying: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
For Africa, 2052 is only the beginning.

The Future

And now we reach the end of the first progress report, though we have barely begun to scratch the surface of the world of Chaos in Diversity.
It is a world which has been irrevocably changed, a world of isolation, and apathy. So here is just a small taste of the flavour events. There were many nations which, though we wanted to fit them in the PR, we simply did not have the space. We have a standoff in Britain, a crisis in India, droughts in Poland, and more than I could even fit into a singular run-on sentence!
But something tells me that next time, we’ll be looking at Italy and... Oh dear.
Thank you!
If you enjoyed reading this and want to know more, the best place to look is almost certainly our discord, where we regularly post teasers, updates, and you can ask the mod team your questions!
And if you can write, make GFX, or code, please do not hesitate to make an application to join the team!
Goodbye and let us pray that the future is brighter than this one!

[Up With The Stars] Progress Report 1: The New American Politics

Hello everyone! It's been about a month since I announced my submod Up With The Stars, which seeks to rework the United States and especially the Second American Civil War to fix lore issues and be more fun and engaging to play. In that time, the submod's dev team has made some great progress (you guys are going to love the stuff u/RealAlfredJodl is cooking up for the Philippines, German East Asia, Japan, and the Pacific in general when he's ready to share some of it with you), and today u/randomperson654 and I want to present a small sample of what we've got done: an overview of our redone lore for the 1936 election and American politics in general. The US in 1936 in Up With The Stars is a different place than in base Kaiserreich...
The Democrats
The Democratic Party in 1936 is split. Liberal Democrats are an increasingly marginalized wing of the party, with some giving up on the Democrats as a lost cause and aligning themselves with the Farmer-Labor Party (in Minnesota so many have defected that some are suggesting that party should rebrand itself as 'Farmer-Labor-Democrat'). This, combined with two-time presidential candidate Al Smith's abandonment of politics to focus on real estate, has left Representative and Speaker of the House John Nance "Cactus Jack" Garner of Texas as the leader of a predominantly conservative Democratic Party. Garner proposes to resolve the Depression through a combination of austerity on the federal level, regulation of Wall Street to rebuild confidence in the financial markets, and limited governmental investment, especially in rural areas. He rejects radicalism in all its forms and believes that a careful hand and unwavering commitment to American ideals can and will see the country through the crisis, but it is unclear if these politics can be sold to voters on a national scale.
In stark contrast is the insurgent Longist faction of the Democratic Party. Although some critics have suggested this is less of a faction and more of a cult of personality for former Louisiana Governor Huey P. Long, it's undeniable that Long and his coalition are not to be underestimated. The Kingfish was elected governor of Louisiana in 1928, and within four years had so completely destroyed his political opposition - even subjugating the long-standing conservative Old Regular political machine - that the state is now effectively a dominion of him and his allies. Indeed, Long worked quickly enough that he ran for (and naturally won) a term as senator in 1930, though he has only actually held the seat from 1932 on. Long has since spread his influence to other parts of the nation - notably Arkansas, Kansas, Idaho, Iowa, and North Dakota - and assembled a surprisingly strong coalition of midwestern and (to a much lesser extent) southern progressives and populists.
Much of Long's success comes from his policies, or at least public perception of them. Some are considered reasonable - his term as Louisiana governor saw massive public works projects and increased funding to hospitals and schools, and he has suggested a national highway-building project, increased school funding, and a 'war on disease' as part of a comprehensive federal recovery program. Other proposals, however, are viewed charitably as infeasible and uncharitably as downright crazy. The first version of Long's famed 'Share-Our-Wealth' plan, for instance, called for a strict progressive tax, legal limits on personal wealth, and severe limits on the power of Wall Street, with the earnings redistributed as part of a national dividend. Met with harsh criticism from economists calling the plan unviable and as likely to permanently destroy what remains of the US economy as save it, the plan has since become a collection of ambiguous and ever-shifting taxes, pensions, and payments with no real direction. Long himself has developed doubts and admitted that he is "Going to have to call in some great minds to help" implement the plan after he takes the White House.
Despite the clear holes in parts of Long's platform and conservatives denouncing it as little more than syndicalism in disguise (something Long emphatically denies), Long's popular support seems to grow every day...except among the Democratic Party establishment, which loathes him. If Long can be kept in the Democratic Party they would be the favorites to win the 1936 election, but if he were to be denied his next step towards greater political power he would be certain to split the party as he searches for greener pastures.
There are also two weaker factions within the Democratic Party. Despite Smith's failed attempts to take the White House in 1928 and 1932, the liberal cause is not yet fully extinguished. Now led by Senator Cordell Hull of Tennessee, the liberals have little chance to take the nomination on their own, but John Nance Garner is a savvy political operator and might - just might - give up his own presidential ambitions and pull the strings needed to give Hull the nomination as a means of outmanuevering Huey Long in favor of a more agreeable liberal candidate. Of course, doing so would undoubtedly drive Long and his backers to quit the Democrats in protest, and would do the same for the other main faction: that led by Governor Eugene Talmadge of Georgia and obsessed with what he euphemistically refers to as "the Southern way of life". Talmadge, a hardcore conservative and rabid white supremacist, has absolutely no hope of gaining the nomination. Still, he and his allies have managed to gather a surprising amount of support throughout the Deep South, aided in part by their overt support for the Ku Klux Klan against Socialist-supported groups seeking equal rights for African-Americans. While Talmadge will certainly back Garner, and a nominee Long could make an alliance of convenience to bring him into his camp, were he to refuse to back the Democratic nominee he could prove a headache for the Democrats in their Solid South...
The Republicans
The Republicans are almost serene by contrast. Enjoying a heavy advantage in the Electoral College, they should be odds-on favorites to win the 1936 election, but the Republicans also have Herbert Hoover. Political cartoons portray the elephant of the GOP weighed down by another elephant tied around its neck - and this second elephant is always labeled 'Hoover'. In fact, Hoover is so widely loathed that he has been explicitly told to not even consider attending the 1936 Republican National Convention in Cleveland, and to send Vice President Charles Curtis instead. In part, Hoover is hated (alongside the Republicans more broadly) because he is viewed as having stolen the 1932 presidential election when it was sent to the House of Representatives, with Republican-controlled House delegations voting for Hoover even when their states had voted for Smith or Coxey. The crippling losses Republicans suffered in the 1934 midterms speak to the displeasure the American populace felt at this, and it will not be easy for the next Republican nominee to make the pitch for giving his party another four years in the White House.
The Republicans have two main candidates with a chance of winning that nomination. William Borah, the aging but popular Senator from Idaho, seeks to direct the Republicans back to the turn of the century with a classically Progressive platform of governmental intervention in both social and economic spheres. He enjoys the support of Theodore Roosevelt's son Quentin (currently a Senator from New York), Mayor of New York City Fiorello La Guardia, and Representative Wendell Willkie of Ohio, a former Democrat who jumped to the Republicans in 1932 and surprisingly kept his seat in 1934. The other potential nominee, Kansas oilman Alf Landon, has a firm reputation as an economic conservative and, although he has criticized Hoover, has proposed only mild reforms and generally suggested the best way to fight the Depression is to free business and the markets to handle the crisis themselves - when he has made any public statements at all; he is hardly an outspoken individual. Whoever the party nominates, they have a long road ahead of them as the incumbent party of an unpopular president, though Borah likely stands a better chance than Landon to claw back territory in the Midwest.
Farmer-Labor
That the Republicans need to claw back ground at all makes clear the strength of the one party undeniably on the upswing in 1936: the Farmer-Labor Party. From its roots as a minor party formed around the concerns of Minnesotan farmers facing tough economic times as the Weltkrieg dragged on, Farmer-Labor saw its strength expand rapidly throughout the Upper Midwest in the 1920s. Then the party shocked the nation in 1932 when its nominee, Jacob Coxey, Sr., won outright in Minnesota, Iowa, and South Dakota, and came in second in Wisconsin and Ohio. The resulting split in the Electoral College forced the election to the House, where Herbert Hoover was elected by Republican-dominated House delegations.
Far from being blamed for this event, Farmer-Labor proved to be the big winner in the 1934 midterms, taking full control of several state legislatures (some of which are now transitioning to the unicameral system), doubling the number of House seats held, and adding three new Senators to its ranks. Some say it added a fourth: George Norris of Nebraska, friend of Huey Long and William Borah, and uncompromising progressive, who has chosen to publicly support Farmer-Labor but who has retained his Republican party identification to preserve his seniority in the Senate. Regardless, of what party Norris officially belongs to, his support has lent further credibility to Farmer-Labor, and especially to the man who will undoubtedly be the Farmer-Labor Party’s candidate for 1936: Minnesota Governor Floyd Olson, who enjoys all the backing within the party he’ll ever need.
Indeed, the only real debate within the party is its relationship with the Socialist Party. Many radicals talk about forming a joint ticket with the Socialists to unite the left in the upcoming election, but the Farmer-Labor Party has a complex relationship with the SPA. The perfect example of this is their dynamic in the state of Wisconsin, where the Farmer-Labor-affiliated Wisconsin Progressive Party regularly fluctuates between cooperating with the socialists against conservative resistance and feuding with them over what type of reforms should be implemented. It's not surprising that Olson has reservations about what associating with the SPA may do to Farmer-Labor's credibility and efforts to sway voters in key places like Ohio, while Norris is suspicious of their radical agenda in general. But both men are willing to cooperate, and the Socialist Party has shown near-universal approval of the formation of the 'Popular Front' against the two old parties. A choice will have to be made.
But that is not the only choice Farmer-Labor will face. Should Long or Borah (or both) lose their respective primaries, they will almost certainly turn to the Farmer-Labor Party to offer their support. But a coalition can only weld together so many factions that, despite broad ideological similarities, still disagree - sometimes rabidly - on key points. Borah would undoubtedly refuse to cooperate with the Socialists, the Socialists would refuse to cooperate with Long, and if F-L turns down the Socialists some within Farmer-Labor would reject forming a coalition with either or both Senators anyway. That's to say nothing of what else might happen: should Long be denied both the Democratic nomination and the chance to cooperate with the Farmer-Laborites, it's certain he will strike out on his own.
The Socialists
We should finish up by taking a moment to examine the Socialist Party of America. Although there is a sizable 'Totalist' wing, most of the Socialist Party supports orthodox socialist or syndicalist policies, and serves as the political arm of the IWW and AFL. The SPA has greatly increased in power since 1920 and controls some cities outright - Seattle, Cleveland, and most importantly Milwaukee, where decades of 'Sewer Socialism' have left even conservatives grudgingly admitting it is one of the best cities in the country. Despite the afore-mentioned perpetual tensions and ideological disagreements with the Farmer-Laborites the SPA has governed Wisconsin with them for six years; strong support among miners flipped the West Virginia statehouse to them in 1934; and analysts expect that 1936 will be the year the SPA and its allies finally defeat Anaconda and turn Montana's legislature Red. The SPA is on the rise in cities like New York and Pittsburgh, and concerted efforts to do outreach to African-Americans have even given the party a toehold in the South, although at the cost of causing a substantial uptick in support for the Ku Klux Klan (previously on what many thought to be a terminal decline following the Stephenson scandal of 1925).
...which in turn shows us that, if the SPA has proven anything, it is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Detroit, for instance, has been locked in a struggle between Henry Ford and the Socialists for over fifteen years, with Ford generally coming out on top, while in the Southwest the Phelps Dodge Corporation has responded to SPA-encouraged labor organization at their copper mines with regular acts of increasing violence. Meanwhile, the SPA presence in Southern California has been effectively erased thanks to the efforts of the Los Angeles Times and Merchants and Manufacturers Association, who have turned the LAPD into a paramilitary force meant less to protect the city and more to stomp out the least hint of syndicalism in the region. Faced with such opposition, the SPA has no chance of winning the election on their own, and will certainly need to rely on a coalition with Farmer-Labor to have any voice in the next administration of the next president.
Of course, if they were to get into power - or even if the wrong steps were to be taken by a more moderate president - there's no guarantee they'd stay there. Rumors circulate of a cadre of Army and Navy officers lurking in the shadows, armed with a version of the so-called War Plan White and backed by J. Edgar Hoover's Federal Bureau of Investigation, ready for the day they are forced to step in and save America herself...though such claims are surely just paranoid ramblings. Probably.
And there you have it! Next time we hope to be able to show off what the Last Year of the Hoover Administration holds. As the joke goes, even staunch atheists are thanking God there's only one more year left in Hoover's presidency, but at least things can't get any worse. Right?
Before you go, we want to take an opportunity to invite you to consider joining the dev team. We're looking for:

2-3 more coders
Another artist capable of doing portraits and focus tree icons, as well as helping with simpler tasks like event pictures and minister portraits (notably for the Philippines)
Someone with knowledge of the interwar American Army and especially the Navy, as we rework the armed forces of a US that never entered the Weltkrieg and is about to be thrown into another civil war.

Do you fit any of those categories and want to help? Drop a comment and I'll send you a DM with a link to our Discord! For everyone else, thanks for reading and for your support!
DOWN WITH THE TRAITORS, UP WITH THE STARS

Severe dislocation between Prediction Model Odds and Betting Market Odds in the 2020 US Presidential Election

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (August 30th, 2020)

Introduction

Welcome to the /politics polling discussion thread for the general election. As the election nears, polling of both the national presidential popular vote and important swing states is ramping up, and with both parties effectively deciding on nominees, pollsters can get in the field to start assessing the state of the presidential race. Please use this thread to discuss polling and the general state of the presidential or congressional election. Below, you'll find some of the most recent polls, but this is by no means exhaustive, as well as some links to prognosticators sharing election models.
As always though, polls don't vote, people do. Regardless of whether your candidate is doing well or poorly, democracy only works when people vote, and there are always at least a couple polling misses every cycle, some of which are pretty high profile. If you haven't yet done so, please take some time to register to vote or check your registration status.

Polls

Below is a collection of recent polling of the US Presidential election. This is likely incomplete and also omits the generic congressional ballot as well as Senate/House/Gubernatorial numbers that may accompany these polls. Please use the discussion space below to discuss any additional polls not covered. Additionally, not all polls are created equal. If this is your first time looking at polls, the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings page is a helpful tool to assess historic partisan lean in certain pollsters, as well as their past performance.
Several polls are in the field, so we won't have a full picture of the field until next week when more are expected to be released. Until then, here are the polls since August 16th.

Poll	Date	Type	Biden	Trump
USC Dornsife	8-30	National	54	39
YouGov	8-29	National	47	41
Morning Consult	8-29	National	50	44
Morning Consult	8-29	National	52	42
USC Dornsife	8-29	National	52	40
Emerson College	8-28	Massachusetts	69	30
Trafalgar Group	8-28	Michigan	45	46
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-28	National	48	38
Franklin & Marshall College	8-27	Pennsylvania	49	42
Harris Insights & Analytics	8-26	National	47	38
Ipsos	8-26	National	44	37
Benenson Strategy Group	8-26	National	50	39
Rasmussen Reports	8-26	National	46	45
YouGov	8-26	National	50	41
Roanoke College	8-26	Virginia	53	39
Ipsos	8-26	National	47	40
Change Research	8-26	Wisconsin	49	44
Change Research	8-26	Arizona	49	47
Change Research	8-26	Michigan	50	44
Change Research	8-26	Florida	49	46
Change Research	8-26	National	51	43
Change Research	8-26	North Carolina	48	47
Change Research	8-26	Pennsylvania	49	46
Trafalgar Group	8-25	Wisconsin	45	46
Public Policy Polling	8-25	Delaware	58	37
Public Policy Polling	8-25	New York	63	32
Public Policy Polling	8-25	Florida	48	44
Morning Consult	8-24	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-24	National	52	43
Morning Consult	8-24	National	52	42
Morning Consult	8-24	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-24	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-24	National	52	42
Léger	8-24	National	49	40
Morning Consult	8-24	National	52	42
Morning Consult	8-24	North Carolina	49	46
Public Policy Polling	8-24	Texas	48	47
Trafalgar Group	8-24	Louisiana	37	54
YouGov	8-24	National	50	39
TargetSmart	8-24	Ohio	47	46
YouGov	8-23	National	52	42
Morning Consult	8-22	National	52	43
Morning Consult	8-22	National	51	43
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-22	National	49	39
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	Pennsylvania	48	41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	Florida	49	41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	North Carolina	44	46
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	Michigan	50	38
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	Wisconsin	49	39
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-21	Arizona	47	38
Harris Insights & Analytics	8-21	National	46	38
Civiqs	8-21	Wisconsin	51	45
Civiqs	8-21	Pennsylvania	51	44
Civiqs	8-21	Michigan	49	46
Civiqs	8-21	Ohio	47	47
DKC Analytics	8-21	New Jersey	52	33
Saint Anselm College	8-20	New Hampshire	51	43
Muhlenberg College	8-20	Pennsylvania	49	45
Global Strategy Group	8-20	Texas	47	45
Echelon Insights	8-20	National	51	38
Echelon Insights	8-20	National	53	39
Data for Progress	8-20	National	50	41
Morning Consult	8-20	National	47	36
Morning Consult	8-20	National	49	39
Trafalgar Group	8-19	Minnesota	46	46
Ipsos	8-19	National	48	40
Ipsos	8-19	National	45	36
ALG Research	8-19	Louisiana	43	50
Rasmussen Reports	8-19	National	48	44
YouGov	8-19	National	50	40
Harris Insights & Analytics	8-18	National	45	39
OnMessage Inc.	8-18	Wisconsin	47	47
OnMessage Inc.	8-18	Florida	49	49
OnMessage Inc.	8-18	Pennsylvania	50	46
OnMessage Inc.	8-18	Arizona	48	51
GQR Research (GQRR)	8-18	Michigan	52	43
Léger	8-17	National	51	35
Morning Consult	8-17	National	50	43
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	43
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	42
Morning Consult	8-17	National	51	42
Morning Consult	8-17	Wisconsin	49	43
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	8-17	National	48	40
Landmark Communications	8-17	Georgia	44	47
YouGov	8-17	National	49	38
YouGov	8-17	National	50	41
YouGov	8-17	Texas	40	47
ABC News	8-17	National	54	44
ABC News	8-17	National	53	41
ABC News	8-17	National	53	41
SSRS	8-16	National	50	46
YouGov	8-16	National	52	42
East Carolina University	8-16	North Carolina	46	46
NBC News	8-16	National	50	41

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Prognosticators are folks who make projected electoral maps, often on the strength of educated guesses as well as inside information in some cases from campaigns sharing internals with the teams involved. Below are a few of these prognosticators and their assessment of the state of the race:

Cook Political Reports - Charlie Cook's race ratings are well regarded in the political field, and he's been in the business for a while. Cook is known to incorporate both public and nonpublic (ie. internal polling) information in his projections. Also covers (and is perhaps better known for) Senate and House races.
Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball - Larry Sabato has also been in the political prediction business for a while now, and the team at the UVA Center for Politics has been fairly successful in past cycles. Towards the end of the election cycle, Sabato has a policy of making a call in each state, refusing to leave any race in the tossup category. Also covers Senate and House races.
Inside Elections - Inside Elections, run by Nathan Gonzales, is the successor to Stu Rothenberg's Rothenberg Political Reports, which used to be a part of Roll Call. This prognosticator did fairly well in 2018, though Rothenberg himself boldly (along with some other pundits) predicted in 2016 that Donald Trump's path to the presidency was nonexistent. Also covers Senate, House and Gubernatorial races.
Daily Kos Elections - Daily Kos Elections is the direct successor to the Swing State Project website, which merged with Daily Kos in 2010. Despite the liberal lean of the site as a whole, the Daily Kos Elections predictions tend to be fairly even-handed, if not even slightly bearish for Democrats. Presidential numbers aren't up yet but they have Senate, House and Gubernatorial races.
RRH Elections - Red Racing Horses Elections is a site founded by former conservative-leaning members of the Swing State Project community. Despite the conservative nature of the commentary, like DKE, the race predictions tend to be fairly neutral, if slightly bearish for Republicans. Like the Crystal Ball, RRH will call all races before the election so that none are left in the tossup category. The presidential rankings have not been published but they do cover Senate, House, Gubernatorial and Row Officer (statewide elected officials, such as state Attorney General, Secretary of State etc.) races.
Media predictions - CNN | U.S. News | NPR | POLITICO

Polling Models

Polling models are similar to prognosticators (and often the model authors will act like pundits as well), but tend to be about making "educated guesses" on the state of the election. Generally, the models are structured to take in data such as polls and electoral fundamentals, and make a guess based on research on prior elections as to the state of the race in each state. Below are a few of the more prominent models that are online or expected to be online soon:

FiveThirtyEight - after months of work, the model is live! 538's team of analysts have put together a beast of a forecast for 2020. It runs 40,000 simulations of the election and uses that data to come up with a projected winner out of 100 sampled outcomes. It also breaks down the projection to show potential electoral college results, popular vote share, tipping point state likelihood, and it can even be broken down into state-level analytics.
Princeton Election Consortium - this is the model run by Dr. Sam Wang, a neuroscience professor at Princeton University. This model has run in the past two cycles as well, though Sam Wang famously said he'd eat a bug if Donald Trump won the election because his model predicted no path to victory for the eventual winner of the 2016 election. Also includes projections for Senate and House.
JHK Forecasts - the earliest model on the scene this cycle. Jack Kersting's model is one of the newer ones this year and also includes projections for Senate and House.
The Economist - this is the model run by G. Elliott Morris, who previously had a midterm election model under The Crosstab.
Niskanen Center - Rachel Bitecofer's projection, which only seems to update a couple times a cycle. Part of this has to do with Bitecofer's central argument that there are generally no swing voters, and electoral fundamentals drive the outcome of the election. This was put to the test in the 2018 midterms, where Bitecofer very early on predicted a Democratic pickup of 40-45 seats in the House, which fell about where the election ended up.
Lean Tossup - a foreign model from Canada. This model did relatively well in the 2019 Canadian election, but this appears to be the first time they've tried forecasting the US Presidential election. Also includes Senate and House projections.
Primary Model - Helmut Norpoth's model does not actually change with inputs anymore. The outcome it predicts, stated as a 91% chance for President Trump to win reelection, is premised entirely on the primary vote totals in the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries from earlier this year. Despite being a bit of an outlier against other models, this one was among the only to forecast that then-candidate Donald Trump was a favorite to win election in 2016, and has been applied to correctly predict the winner of 5 of the past 6 presidential elections.

Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are betting markets where people put money on the line to estimate the likelihood of one party winning a seat or state. Most of these markets will also tend to move depending on polling and other socioeconomic factors in the same way that prognosticators and models will work. Predictit and Election Betting Odds are prominent in this space, although RealClearPolitics has an aggregate of other betting sites as well.

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (September 2nd, 2020)

Introduction

Polls

Below is a collection of recent polling of the US Presidential election. This is likely incomplete and also omits the generic congressional ballot as well as Senate/House/Gubernatorial numbers that may accompany these polls. Please use the discussion space below to discuss any additional polls not covered. Additionally, not all polls are created equal. If this is your first time looking at polls, the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings page is a helpful tool to assess historic partisan lean in certain pollsters, as well as their past performance.
With the conclusion of both major parties’ nominating conventions, pollsters scrambled into the field to conduct polls of swing states and the national race. The result has been a slew of high quality pollsters releasing their numbers on Wednesday as well as today, which paint a picture of the electorate right after the candidates are expected to have received a temporary convention bounce.

Poll	Date	Type	Biden	Trump
Quinnipiac University	9-3	Florida	48	45
Quinnipiac University	9-3	Pennsylvania	52	44
Monmouth University	9-3	North Carolina	48	46
Monmouth University	9-3	North Carolina	47	45
Monmouth University	9-3	North Carolina	48	46
Rasmussen Reports	9-3	Pennsylvania	47	48
Harper Polling	9-3	Minnesota	48	45
USC Dornsife	9-3	National	50	42
USC Dornsife	9-3	National	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	52	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	52	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	52	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	53	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	52	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	40
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	40
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	46
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	51	41
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	40
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	46
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	42
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	49	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	43
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	48	44
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	45
Morning Consult	9-2	Wisconsin	47	45
Fox News	9-2	Wisconsin	49	41
Fox News	9-2	North Carolina	49	45
Fox News	9-2	Wisconsin	50	42
Fox News	9-2	North Carolina	50	46
Fox News	9-2	Arizona	49	40
Fox News	9-2	Arizona	49	39
Ipsos	9-2	National	43	38
SSRS	9-2	National	51	43
Harris Insights & Analytics	9-2	National	46	40
Morning Consult	9-2	National	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	National	51	43
Morning Consult	9-2	National	50	43
Morning Consult	9-2	National	51	44
Morning Consult	9-2	National	52	42
Morning Consult	9-2	National	51	43
Quinnipiac University	9-2	National	52	42
Qriously	9-2	National	46	41
Opinium	9-2	Florida	50	43
Opinium	9-2	Wisconsin	53	39
IBD	9-2	National	49	41
YouGov	9-2	National	51	40
Rasmussen Reports	9-2	National	48	45
Monmouth University	9-2	Pennsylvania	49	46
Monmouth University	9-2	Pennsylvania	49	45
Monmouth University	9-2	Pennsylvania	48	47
Suffolk University	9-2	National	46	41
Ipsos	9-2	National	47	40
USC Dornsife	9-2	National	51	42
USC Dornsife	9-2	National	51	41
Opinium	9-2	National	53	39
Suffolk University	9-2	National	49	43
Selzer & Co.	9-2	National	49	41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies	9-1	National	49	40
Landmark Communications	9-1	Georgia	40	47
East Carolina University	9-1	North Carolina	46	48
Public Policy Polling	9-1	Michigan	48	44
Expedition Strategies	9-1	Montana	44	48
University of Nevada, Las Vegas	9-1	Nevada	44	38
Morning Consult	9-1	National	52	43
Morning Consult	9-1	National	51	43
Morning Consult	9-1	Texas	47	48
Morning Consult	9-1	Florida	49	47
Morning Consult	9-1	Pennsylvania	49	45
Morning Consult	9-1	National	51	43
Morning Consult	9-1	North Carolina	49	47
Morning Consult	9-1	Ohio	45	50
Morning Consult	9-1	Minnesota	50	43
Morning Consult	9-1	Florida	50	45
Morning Consult	9-1	Georgia	49	46
Morning Consult	9-1	Michigan	50	44
Morning Consult	9-1	Georgia	46	47
Morning Consult	9-1	Colorado	51	41
Morning Consult	9-1	Wisconsin	52	43
Morning Consult	9-1	Michigan	52	42
Morning Consult	9-1	Arizona	52	42
Morning Consult	9-1	Colorado	51	41
Morning Consult	9-1	Texas	46	47
Morning Consult	9-1	Minnesota	50	42
Morning Consult	9-1	Ohio	45	49
Morning Consult	9-1	North Carolina	49	46
Morning Consult	9-1	Pennsylvania	50	44
Morning Consult	9-1	Arizona	45	47
USC Dornsife	9-1	National	51	41
USC Dornsife	9-1	National	51	41
Léger	9-1	National	49	42
AtlasIntel	9-1	National	49	46
Emerson College	8-31	National	51	48
RMG Research	8-31	National	48	44
Global Strategy Group	8-31	Pennsylvania	53	43
Global Strategy Group	8-31	Pennsylvania	50	42
Public Policy Polling	8-31	Georgia	47	46
Harris Insights & Analytics	8-31	National	47	38
GQR Research (GQRR)	8-31	Pennsylvania	52	43
Trafalgar Group	8-31	Missouri	41	51
USC Dornsife	8-31	National	53	40
USC Dornsife	8-31	National	52	40
John Zogby Strategies	8-30	National	45	42
John Zogby Strategies	8-30	National	48	42
USC Dornsife	8-30	National	54	39
USC Dornsife	8-30	National	53	39

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Cook Political Reports - Charlie Cook's race ratings are well regarded in the political field, and he's been in the business for a while. Cook is known to incorporate both public and nonpublic (ie. internal polling) information in his projections. Also covers (and is perhaps better known for) Senate and House races.
Larry Sabato's Crystal Ball - Larry Sabato has also been in the political prediction business for a while now, and the team at the UVA Center for Politics has been fairly successful in past cycles. Towards the end of the election cycle, Sabato has a policy of making a call in each state, refusing to leave any race in the tossup category. Also covers Senate and House races.
Inside Elections - Inside Elections, run by Nathan Gonzales, is the successor to Stu Rothenberg's Rothenberg Political Reports, which used to be a part of Roll Call. This prognosticator did fairly well in 2018, though Rothenberg himself boldly (along with some other pundits) predicted in 2016 that Donald Trump's path to the presidency was nonexistent. Also covers Senate, House and Gubernatorial races.
Daily Kos Elections - Daily Kos Elections is the direct successor to the Swing State Project website, which merged with Daily Kos in 2010. Despite the liberal lean of the site as a whole, the Daily Kos Elections predictions tend to be fairly even-handed, if not even slightly bearish for Democrats. Presidential numbers aren't up yet but they have Senate, House and Gubernatorial races.
RRH Elections - Red Racing Horses Elections is a site founded by former conservative-leaning members of the Swing State Project community. Despite the conservative nature of the commentary, like DKE, the race predictions tend to be fairly neutral, if slightly bearish for Republicans. Like the Crystal Ball, RRH will call all races before the election so that none are left in the tossup category. The presidential rankings have not been published but they do cover Senate, House, Gubernatorial and Row Officer (statewide elected officials, such as state Attorney General, Secretary of State etc.) races.
Media predictions - CNN | U.S. News | NPR | POLITICO

Polling Models

FiveThirtyEight - 538's runs 40,000 simulations of the election and uses that data to come up with a projected winner out of 100 sampled outcomes. It also breaks down the projection to show potential electoral college results, popular vote share, tipping point state likelihood, and it can even be broken down into state-level analytics.
Princeton Election Consortium - this is the model run by Dr. Sam Wang, a neuroscience professor at Princeton University. This model has run in the past two cycles as well, though Sam Wang famously said he'd eat a bug if Donald Trump won the election because his model predicted no path to victory for the eventual winner of the 2016 election. Also includes projections for Senate and House.
JHK Forecasts - the earliest model on the scene this cycle. Jack Kersting's model is one of the newer ones this year and also includes projections for Senate and House.
The Economist - this is the model run by G. Elliott Morris, who previously had a midterm election model under The Crosstab.
Niskanen Center - Rachel Bitecofer's projection, which only seems to update a couple times a cycle. Part of this has to do with Bitecofer's central argument that there are generally no swing voters, and electoral fundamentals drive the outcome of the election. This was put to the test in the 2018 midterms, where Bitecofer very early on predicted a Democratic pickup of 40-45 seats in the House, which fell about where the election ended up.
Lean Tossup - a foreign model from Canada. This model did relatively well in the 2019 Canadian election, but this appears to be the first time they've tried forecasting the US Presidential election. Also includes Senate and House projections.
Primary Model - Helmut Norpoth's model does not actually change with inputs anymore. The outcome it predicts, stated as a 91% chance for President Trump to win reelection, is premised entirely on the primary vote totals in the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries from earlier this year. Despite being a bit of an outlier against other models, this one was among the only to forecast that then-candidate Donald Trump was a favorite to win election in 2016, and has been applied to correctly predict the winner of 5 of the past 6 presidential elections.

Prediction Markets

us midterm election odds video

The 2018 Midterms were up-and-down for the GOP writ large, but uniformly bad for Donald Trump's chances in 2020. How 2018's results should worry Trump bettors, and more. Decency and decorum in American politics will still be a distant dream, even if Democrats win the midterm elections on November 6. The US midterm elections are just a week away as a deeply divided nation anxiously watches whether the Republicans will maintain their majority in Congress, or if the Democrats will pull off a surprise retake of the House or the Senate. Any pretense of 2022 Midterm Election Betting Odds Odds For 2022 Midterm Elections November 8, 2022, is the date all registered voters from around the United States will decide which candidates will be elected to public office at the congressional, state, and local levels during the 2022 midterm elections. Midterm elections 2018: Trump odds-on NOT to be re-elected in 2020 US PRESIDENT Donald Trump is odds on NOT to be re-elected in 2020, with the Democrats heavily backed to win a majority in the US Midterm Odds. Next Tuesday, two years since his election shocked betting markets, Donald Trump will face the first meaningful electoral test of his presidency. Although his name is not on the ballot for local races across the country, the president’s omnipresence has come to define all US political matters. Joe Biden is firming up in betting odds to become the next president as polls close in the US election. Picture: Jim Watson/AFP Source:AFP In 2016, Trump was $2.35 before markets closed ahead of

us midterm election odds top

WHY TRUMP WILL WIN! - 2020 Election Prediction (Feb. 2019 ...

Tracking mainly swing states and projections, coverage by NBC.Timeline (When states were called)2:43 - 7:30pm, polls closed in three important swing states, ... Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders are facing off in six primaries on Tuesday, their first big test since Super Tuesday. Of the delegates awarded so far, Biden has... Find Great Deals at Amazon Here - http://amzn.to/2q35kbc2020 Senate Map Early Races Projection - 2020 Senate Elections Predictions - Election Predictions - E... Nate Silver describes his outlook on the 2016 US presidential election. Who will run? When will Hillary Clinton decide? From the session "Why Are You the One... I also have election nights, which are animated versions where I go through the 7.00pm poll closings, then 7.30pm, 8.00pm, 8.30pm, etc etc. This channel is devoted to elections, and I talk about ... I 2020 Democratic Primary Election Night I 2020 Democratic Primary I 2020 Democratic Primary Election Night I 2020 Election Night Prediction Kamala Harris vs Donald Trump I 2020 Election Night ... President Trump formally launched his 2020 re-election campaign Tuesday night before a jam-packed crowd in Orlando's Amway Center arena, and quickly unloaded... President Trump will probably win the electoral college in 2020 regardless of the Democratic Nominee.SUPPORT MY PATREON: http://patreon.com/RedEagleTVTwitter... Please subscribe! http://bit.ly/LetsTalkElections Please subscribe to my second channel! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwo1eUt-... The real goldmine, however, is the ability to see which way the polls should be leaning and what the real odds are in any race. Watch this clip as Flip Pidot breaks down what trends he's seeing ...

2022 Midterm Election Betting Odds

us midterm election odds

us midterm election odds - win

CNET: After the midterm elections, the odds improve a little for a US data privacy law - CNET

Begun, the Drone Wars have: Turkey, Libya, Syria, the Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict, and how drones are changing warfare

1. In the Beginning

2. Turkey

3. Libya

4. Syria

5. Artsakh

6. Curb-stomp battle

7. Ending

8. What Now?

NL-ELECTS the House Speaker, 117th Congress, Pelosi v. McCarthy

VOTE HERE!

Progress Report 1: Welcome to Endless Grey

Introduction To Dystopia:

Economic Points

China (2050-2052)

The United States of America (2050-2052)

Western Europe (2050-2052)

Africa (2050-2052)

The Future

[Up With The Stars] Progress Report 1: The New American Politics

Severe dislocation between Prediction Model Odds and Betting Market Odds in the 2020 US Presidential Election

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (August 30th, 2020)

Introduction

Polls

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Polling Models

Prediction Markets

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (September 2nd, 2020)

Introduction

Polls

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Polling Models

Prediction Markets

us midterm election odds video

us midterm election odds top

WHY TRUMP WILL WIN! - 2020 Election Prediction (Feb. 2019 ...